Written by

Automatic federal budget cuts to Head Start funding mean dozens of Sioux Falls children are receiving part-time preschool rather than full-time, while other parents are footing the bill to keep their children in programs they like.

The Obama administration estimates 57,000 children nationwide and 160 in South Dakota have lost their seats in Head Start. U.S. lawmakers’ failure to reach an agreement on the federal budget forced a 5.27 percent funding cut for Head Start, which serves children ages 3 to 5 from low-income families.

The Head Start Program in Deadwood closed in May, leaving 20 children without services. Other Head Start providers have tried to maintain the number of children served while making budget cuts around the edges — furloughing workers, cutting benefits, eliminating positions or merging programs.

Kathy Cruse, executive director for the South Dakota Head Start Association, said some facilities have eliminated days at the beginning or end of the year to cut costs.

“Our programs are losing days, where they are starting later, or maybe they’re not running as many hours, to try to make up some of the money,” she said.

“It makes us worry about being able to keep employees, as well, if we’re cutting hours. The cutting slots for students is just their last resort.”

The Sioux Falls School District has the local Head Start grant, worth $2.28 million. Rather than forcing kids out entirely, the district in May decided to eliminate its daylong, year-round preschool program, which served 73 children at several private child care centers; those kids then were free to join the district’s free Head Start program that operates only during the school year and for 3.5 hours a day.

Youth Enrichment Services in Sioux Falls used to serve about 40 families through Head Start as one of the school district’s community partners. CEO Karen Fogas said just under half could afford to pay to keep their children enrolled in an early childhood program at YES; some do get assistance from the state based on family income.

(Page 2 of 2)

“We helped as many of the families as we could, and some families have opted to stay with us, but some families just didn’t have the financial means to be able to do that,” Fogas said. “It (sequestration) has really impacted families negatively because the niche that community-based (Head Start) filled was families that were working or in school and needed that wraparound care, and now they don’t have it.

“What we worry about is, we know that children who stay in quality preschool programs make important gains and are more likely to succeed in school. When parents are forced to utilize less-quality home situations, those children, it can impact them for their whole lives, and that’s really sad,” she said.

Cruse said losing free child care can have a domino effect on parents.

“If they get into another facility, those parents are going to have to pay for it, because Head Start is a free program for poverty children. A lot of those parents can’t find a way to pay for it, and so they end up quitting jobs so they can take care of their children. This whole thing can just snowball, and make their situation so much worse,” she said.

The move to part-time only programs saved enough money so the district will continue to serve the same number of children, at least for the foreseeable future, barring any further federal budget cuts, said Jane Leite, Head Start supervisor for the Sioux Falls School District.

In addition to the program change, Sioux Falls left two open jobs unfilled.

Cruse said other states have appropriated money to make up for lost federal money for Head Start, but that hasn’t happened in South Dakota.

For Youth Enrichment Services, short of additional money from the state, it’s difficult to come up with money to fill the gap, Fogas said.

“We already raise about $300,000 to $350,000 from the Sioux Falls community to support the Boys and Girls Club kids, which is a drop-in program,” Fogas said.

“Our community is incredibly generous, and I don’t think putting that back on individuals is the right thing to do. I do think there should be government help, because these kids are our future we’re talking about, and if they’re not successful, we are going to pay a price down the line.”